A RECENT week was a fairly gruelling one of meetings for me — three long Torridge ones, a Bridge Trust one and even one at the Crematorium.

The Torridge ones were mainly concerned with setting our budgets for next year and we had gone out to "consultation" over this — and got 188 responses from the public and 20 from parish councils. This represents about 0.31% of the electorate which doesn't seem very impressive. Additionally the Holsworthy and Torrington Area Boards and the Business Rate Forum were asked for their views, but no specifically Bideford or Northam bodies which, as this area pays by far the highest proportion of Torridge's council taxes, seems an oversight. When I raised this a Torridge officer did say that anyone could return one of our questionnaires as they were "widely available on the council website", but as councillor Caroline Church pointed out a lot of people in her East-the-Water ward do not have web access.

That these responses are important is reflected in the fact that Bideford Harbour, the Burton and Northam Burrows came in the bottom group of what respondents viewed as important. I had to point out that these were the only named/located services and I did wonder if, for example, Holsworthy Market Hall or something in Broadwoodwidger were listed how much support that would get from people in Bideford and Northam? The final budget will be hammered out soon — and there will be some painful cuts right across the whole spectrum of the council's services.

◆◆◆◆◆

AT ONE of these recent Torridge meetings Steve Pitcher came back to us to report on how North Devon+ is doing. This is the new umbrella organisation striving to regenerate the area.

He began his presentation with an economic overview of Torridge and North Devon districts which was sobering to say the least. Annual salaries average £21,500 in the UK — but Torridge comes in at around £13,500 which is the second lowest in the country, with North Devon being the next lowest.

Within Torridge, 2.9% of the work force, or about 1,100 people, are currently unemployed with one-third of them being in the 18-24 age group. Some 76% of Torridge businesses employ from one to four people and we have very few large employers with only one, the Appledore shipyard, being in Torridge and even that has a fluctuating work force.

Of our businesses 23% are self-employed (UK 10%) which, as Mr Pitcher said, is both a strength and a weakness in that they are resilient, but their capability for growth is limited. He went on to make five major points about the future of the area which are worth thinking about:

a) many local businesses are in survival mode with short time working

b) the area has had a "better recession" in overall terms than other areas

c) unemployment has risen but not as quickly as in previous recessions

d) recovery is likely to be slower in this area than elsewhere

e) the next three months will be crucial in deciding the length of the recession.

After this worrying assessment he invited questions with the first coming from Steve Clarke who thought previous grants to expand local firms had unfairly skewed competition. As Mr Pitcher pointed out, however, they weren't there to rescue struggling concerns but only gave grants to help successful businesses expand further and all such applications were vetted by a panel consisting mainly of local accountants whom he described in an aside as "wonderful people". If you are a local business with good ideas why not contact them?

Another question was why weren't we trying to attract high paying companies to the area – with the blindingly obvious answer that no one was moving at the moment, indeed all companies seem to have battened down the hatches in order to weather the recession. There were then queries as to training for 18-24 year olds — here "targeted schemes" were the order of the day. It was also pointed out that there were no photographs of Westward Ho! beach in the new local tourism guide the group had published.

The problem of actually funding North Devon+ also came up and again the bizarre idea that the local council would give their assets to the group seemed to be their main idea. When it got to their "Scheme of Work" over this year I strongly queried one entry which is supposed to happen in the next three months. It reads: "Torridge District Council advise removal King George V designation from Kingsley Road in addition to soft market testing to identify suitable retailers" — in other words seeing if any supermarket group wants to develop the Sports Ground. I was surprised to read this as though it has been talked about, usually by the Bideford Regeneration Initiative, I cannot recall any real council decision let alone discussion being held on this idea.

Indeed, I was so exercised by the implications of this that I had the plan, and all the many others presented to us, made "aspirations" rather than "policy" which means nothing can happen without Torridge councillors, who actually manage the council's assets on behalf of the public, making final decisions on any suggestions like this.

◆◆◆◆◆

MENTION of the BRI reminds me that this group is facing some major changes. At a meeting of Torridge's Policy committee the council's leader James Morrish reckoned that we had "an opportunity to draw a line under the BRI and to go forward" in that its role had been superseded. He was backed by councillor Steve Clarke and we decided to replace it with the Bideford Delivery Board which will consist mainly of councillors with membership being broader than previously.

This is, I think, good news as the old BRI certainly had the appearance of an inward looking group which spent a lot of money but didn't seem to produce much. The new Board will actually be a working group unable to take major decisions off its own bat. All of these will now have to go to Torridge before anything happens — and the minutes of their meetings will have to be ratified every month. Let us hope the new Board can get things moving.